rorkesdriftvc.com :: View topic - Those not awarded the VC or Distinguished Conduct Medal

Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2008 9:20 pm

The names below all took part in the defence of Rorke's Drift. They were with those that were awarded the VC or Distinguished Conduct Medal.

So to you experts out there who else do you think should have been awarded either the VC or the Distinguished Conduct Medal. We all know why the VC awards were given to the chosen few.
But the work the others were doing without doubt helped those that achieve the awarded VCs

And in this particular battle who has the right to say who gets what. In my opinion each and everyone should have at least been awarded the Distinguished Conduct Medal.
I feel it would be a good contribution to hear from those that have published books and those like me with a natural interest in this subject.

General's Staff
Maybin, G.W. Colour-Sergeant.

Royal Artillery N Battery 5th Brigade

Evans, Abraham. Gunner 1643
Howard, Arthur. Gunner 2077
Lewis, Thomas. Bombardier. 458
Royal Engineers 5th Company

2nd Battalion, 3rd (East Kent) Regiment of Foot (The Buffs)
Milne, Frederick. Sergeant. 2260

1st Battalion, 24th (2nd Warwickshire) Regiment of Foot
Beckett, William. Private. 25B/135, died of wounds 23 January 1879
Desmond, Patrick. Private. 25B/568
Horrigan, William. Private. 1-24/1861, killed in action 22 January 1879
Jenkins, James. Private. 25B/841, killed in action 22 January 1879
Nicholas, Edward. Private. 25B/625, killed in action 22 January 1879
Payton, Thomas. Private. 25B/372
Turner, Henry. Private. 25B/l04
Waters, John. Private. 1-24/447
Wilson, Edward. Sergeant. 25B/56

2nd Battalion, 24th Regiment (2nd Warwickshire)
Adams, Robert. Private. 25B/987 D Company, killed in action 22 January 1879
Ashton, James. Private. 2-24/913, B Company
Barry, Thomas. Private. 25B/1381, B Company
Bennett, William Private. 25B/918, B Company
Bessell, William. Lance-Corporal. 25B/l287, B Company
Bly, John. Private. 2-24/2427, B Company
Bromwich, Joseph. Private. 25B/1524, B Company
Buckley, Thomas. Private. 25B/1184, B Company
Burke, Thomas. Private. 25B/1220, B Company
Bushe, James. Private. 2-24/2350, B Company
Camp, William Henry. Private. 25B/1181, B Company
Chester, Thomas. Private. 25B/1241, B Company
Chick, James. Private. 25B/1335 D Company, killed in action 22 January 1879
Clayton, Thomas. Private. 25B/755, B Company
Cole, Robert. Private. 25B/1459, F Company
Cole, Thomas. Private. 25B/801 B Company, killed in action 22 January 1879
Collins, Thomas. Private.25B/1396, B Company
Connolly, John. Private. 25B/906, C Company
Connors, Anthony. Private. 2-24/2310, B Company
Connors, Timothy. Private. 2-24/1323, B Company
Cooper, William. Private. 2-24/2453, F Company
Davies, George. Private. 25B/470, B Company
Davis, William Henry. Private. 25B/1363, B Company
Daw, Thomas. Private. 25B/1178, B Company
Deacon, George. Private. 25B/1467, B Company, alias George D Power
Deane, Michael. Private. 25B/1357, B Company
Dick, James. Private. 2-24/1697, B Company
Dicks, William. Private. 2-24/1634, B Company
Driscoll, Thomas. Private. 25B/971, B Company
Dunbar, James. Private. 25B/1421, B Company
Edwards, George. Private. 25B/922, B Company, alias George Edward Orchard
Evans, Frederick. Private. 25B/953, H Company
Fagan, John. Private. 25B/969 B Company, killed in action 22 January 1879
French, George. Corporal. 2-24/582, B Company
Galgey, Patrick. Drummer 2-24/1713, D Company
Gallagher, Henry. Sergeant. 25B/81, B Company
Gee, Edward. Private. 2-24/2429, B Company
Hagan, James. Private. 25B/978, B Company
Halley, William. Lance-Corporal. 25B/l282, B Company
Harris, John. Private. 25B/1062, B Company
Hayden, Garret. Private. 2-24/1769 D Company, killed in action 22 January 1879
Hayes, Patrick. Drummer 2-24/2067, B Company
Jobbins, John. Private. 25B/1061, B Company
Jones, Evan. Private. 25B/1428, B Company, alias Patrick Cosgrove
Jones, John. Private. 25B/1179, B Company
Jones, John. Private. 25B/970, B Company
Judge, Peter. Private. 2-24/2437, B Company
Kears, Patrick. Private. 25B/972, B Company
Keefe, James. Drummer 2-24/2381, B Company
Key, John. Corporal. 2-24/2389, B Company
Kiley, Michael. Private. 25B/1386, B Company
Lewis, David. Private. 25B/963, B Company, alias James Owen
Lines, Henry. Private. 2-24/1528, B Company
Lloyd, David. Private. 25B/1409, B Company
Lockhart, Thomas. Private. 25B/1176, B Company
Lodge, Joshua. Private. 25B/1304, B Company
Lynch, Thomas Michael. Private. 25B/942, B Company
Lyons, John. Corporal. 25B/1112, B Company
Lyons. John. Private. 2-24/1441, A Company
Manley, John. Private. 2-24/1731, A Company
Marshall, James. Private. 25B/964, B Company
Martin, Henry. Private. 25B/756, B Company
Mason, Charles. Private. 25B/1284, B Company
Maxfield, Robert. Sergeant. 25B/623 G Company, killed in action 22 January 1879
Meehan, John. Drummer 2-24/2383, A Company
Minehan, Michael. Private. 2-24/1527, B Company
Moffatt, Thomas. Private. 25B/968, B Company
Morris, Augustus. Private. 25B/1342, B Company
Morris, Frederick. Private. 25B/525, B Company
Morrison, Thomas. Private. 25B/1371, B Company
Murphy, John. Private. 25B/662, B Company
Neville, William. Private. 25B/1279, B Company
Norris, Robert. Private. 25B/1257, B Company
Osborne, William. Private. 25B/1480, B Company
Parry, Samuel. Private. 25B/1399, B Company
Partridge, William. Private. 25B/1410, G Company
Pitt, Samuel. Private. 25B/1186, B Company
Robinson, Edward. Private. 25B/1286, B Company
Ruck, James. Private. 25B/1065, B Company
Savage, Edward. Private. 25B/1185, B Company
Saxty, Alfred. Corporal. 25B/849, B Company
Scanlon, John. Private. 25B/1051 A Company, killed in action 22 January 1879
Sears, Arthur. Private. 2-24/2404, A Company
Shearman, George. Private. 2-24/1618, B Company
Shergold, John. Private. 2-24/914, B Company
Smith, George. Sergeant. 2-24/1387, B Company
Smith, John. Private. 25B/1005, B Company
Stevens ,Thomas. Private. 25B/777, B Company
Tasker, William. Private. 2-24/1812, B Company
Taylor, Frederick. Private. 25B/973, B Company
Taylor, James. Lance-Sgt. 25B/82, E Company
Taylor, Thomas Edward. Private. 25B/889, B Company
Thomas, John. Private. 25B/1280, B Company, alias Peter Sawyer
Thompson, John. Private. 25B/1394, B Company
Tobin, Michael. Private. 25B/879, B Company
Tobin, Patrick. Private. 25B/641, B Company
Todd, William John. Private. 25B/1281, B Company
Tongue, Robert. Private. 25B/1315, B Company
Wall, John. Private. 25B/1497, B Company
Whetton, Alfred. Private. 2-24/977, B Company
Wilcox, William. Private. 25B/1187, B Company
Williams, John. Private. 25B/934, E Company
Williams, Joseph. Private. 25B/1398 B Company, killed in action 22 January 1879
Williams, Thomas. Lance-Sergeant. 25B/1328, died of wounds 23 January 1879
Windridge, Joseph. Sergeant. 2-24/735, B Company
Woods, Caleb. Private. 25B/1316, B Company

Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2008 10:26 pm

Peter,

In my opinion none of us alive today, even with the hindsight of what we now acknowledge as fact, have the right to sit in judgement of the men and deeds that were performed on 22nd - 23rd January 1879. John Chard summed it up; Of the steadiness and gallant behaviour of the whole garrison I cannot speak too highly. He continued in mentioning a number of names, some of whom were awarded honours and medals and yet others were excluded despite Chard's endorsement.

We can speculate, and I for one have previously done so in relation to one overlooked, in my opinion, hospital defender.

Why limit yourself to Rorke's Drift? I can think of examples at Khambula where men were mentioned in despatches, yet fall in the course of their deeds. I can cite D.C.M. awards from the campaign, where, again in my opinion, the colour of the soldier's skin determined they receive a lesser award rather than a V.C.

By-the-way it is Sgt. Millne of The Buffs, something I only found out after publication.

You also appear to excluded Driver Charles Robson, of 5th (Field) Company, Royal Engineers.

John Y.

Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2008 10:58 pm

A contrary view is that during the Mutiny, for example, men received a VC or DCM when today, despite the abundance of awards, they may get lesser awards or indeed nothing. Awards were bestowed according to the rules of the time, despite the retrospective granting of the VCs to Melvill and Coghill.

I don't have a great deal of sympathy for the argument that every defender deserved a decoration for gallantry when, ultimately, they were just doing the job for which they were paid. It's not sensible, practical or realistic.

I can only endorse Chard's bold remarks above.

Peter

Posted: Thu Jul 17, 2008 4:18 am

Both of your replies have mentioned Chard (VC Award) and other battles.
The aim of this post was to identify those persons who you think should have received more recognition for the action at Rorke's Drift
John you mention (I for one have previously done so in relation to one overlooked, in my opinion, hospital defender.) who and why.
Melvill and Coghill received their VC many years later after the event after much lobbying by their families.
Is it because our knowledge and research into military history is limited to only those that were awarded the VC?

Posted: Thu Jul 17, 2008 11:26 am

,
Dear Peter ( Harman ) ,
One medal that was never thought of ( someone prove me wrong please ) was a Rorke's Drift defence medal , that would have covered all who participated at the defence that day . With 11 VC and 5 DCM those in power were most likely saturated with submissions to have medals for the actions of that day . Some might say the officers at Rorke's Drift got their medals because they were officers , i am not supporting or denying that arguement by the way .

The DCM is hardly a " lesser " medal and submissions are considered before awards made Peter . Remember one defender was in hiding through most of the night , no -one called him coward or any such thing .

16 bravery awards was a fantastic feat , telling me how hard those men fought that day . Yes , Melvill & Coghill did eventually get a VC each but many years later after much peer pressure , this ended the practice of only giving such a medal to those who survived their action .

However one person in my belief warranted a VC was Pte 1398 Joseph Williams who was killed that day , had he been a survivor i believe he would have been on the VC roll of honour . We " argue " daily on just who was there on Jan 22nd 1879 and if ever a time machine were to be invented i would put my name down for the trip to go back to that day and see just what and who were involved that day , clearing up the mystery of the Mounted Infantryman EVANS who in some quarters was a defender , in some accounts a rider who came into camp .

Such is the " meat " of a debating cirlcle such as this , be it formally on this forum or round a log -fire with an ale or two " sorting out " what happend on a January day back in 1879 in South Africa and yes Peter you did forget Dvr RE Charles Robson , " Sapper " . Wink

Posted: Thu Jul 17, 2008 12:08 pm

,
Peter , perhaps you had better add these to your list of DEFENDERS that day .
1. Chard RE VC
2. Bromhead VC
3. Surgeon Reynolds VC .
4. J L DALTON VC.
5. Cpl Schiess VC
6. 2459 C/ Sgt Bourne DCM
7. 2076 Gunner J Cantwell DCM
8. 1542 Pte { Cpl } William Roy DCM
9. 24692 Cpl Francis Attwood ASCorps DCM
10. Pte Michael Mc Mahon DCM , ( Withdrawn )
11. Cpl Rowland Herbert Miller AHCorps
12. Pte Thomas Luddington A H Corps
13. Mr Pearce ( Reynolds servant )
14. 1123 Cpl James Graham ( 90th ) alias Daniel Sheehan
15. 458 Bombardier Thomas Lewis
16. 1643 Gunner Abraham Evans
17. 2077 Gunner Arthur Howard
18. Asst Commissary W Alphonsus Dunne
19. Trooper Robert Green NM Police
20. Trooper Henry Lugg NM Police
21. Cpl Jessy Mayer 1st 3rd NNC
22. Cpl William Doughty 2nd 3rd NNC
23. Cpl John Wilson 2nd 3rd NNC
24. Rev George Smith
25. XHOSA native.
26. Mr Daniels.
27. Cpl Carl Scammel 2nd 3rd NNC
28. Louise Byrne ( store keeper )

I have omitted Lt Adendorff as i have personal beliefs on him being at Rorke's Drift DURING the battle . Research continues apace on all who participated in the Zulu war of 1879 , i have recently received information regarding the death for example of Rowland Hebert Miller . Many an astute researcher continue to do the same no doubt . Amongst my notes i have a picture of Pte Francis Webb ( 2 / 21 st ) whose regiment were at Ulundi as another example , the unknown data is still coming in thick and fast Peter , have no worries , " Sapper " Wink

Any omissions on above list are my error Cool

Posted: Thu Jul 17, 2008 3:21 pm

Peter i see you had the Artillery men in your list so these were not ommissions i picked up on . John Young is correct re MILLNE , his full name being FREDERICK AUGUSTUS MILLNE.

Maybin is a Cornish derivation of the name , the correct surname is MABIN as supported by his great grandson , Lawrie Mabin and documentation such as service papers , by the way Peter did you know that Mabin became a C / Sgt some three years before Frank Bourne ? .

MABIN 1875 , BOURNE 1878 . Frank was amazingly but 23 - 24 when he was raised to this rank . Much has been mentioned re MABIN on this forum if you would like to check the pages , " SAPPER " . Wink

Posted: Thu Jul 17, 2008 4:20 pm

Graham,

You are not comparing 'like with like'. Maybin was oppointed to the rank because his was a very good clerk. Frank Bourne was Colour Sergeant, or in modern terms Company Sergeant Major of an Infantry Company, after only six years service. They are competely different roles.

Posted: Thu Jul 17, 2008 4:33 pm

Dear All,
whilst John Young has hit the nail on the head with his quote of Chard's comments about the bravery of the defenders of Rorke's Drift, here's another one from a (debatable) great man who echoes Chard's
accurate appraisal of the soldier's efforts under his command in a slightly different form:

'No one has the right to grade a President (or any other man of
note TJ)- who has not sat in his chair.'

We can obviously apply this quote to any sphere of life.

It is great men, great thinkers, great heroes that have the depth of character, intelligence and observation that can make worthwhile comments like these. This is of much more value than the 'red-tabloid-sensationalist-personality-historian' type of 'word-bending' that we have seen of recent years, outside of this forum and we could aptly apply President Kennedy's words to those who have tried to discredit and downplay the heroics and significance of the men who fought at Rorke's Drift and the battle.
However, Peter Harman does have a point that we can as individuals, speculate to whom we feel should and should not have been decorated with either a Victoria Cross or D.C.M. but my own feeling is that we are not in the chair that President Kennedy says we need to be sat in to form a valid judgement. Over to John (or Peter)

Tony.

Posted: Thu Jul 17, 2008 5:34 pm

The decorations being discussed are intended to recognize extraordinary individual valour (often at conscious hazard to one's own life) and in so doing to encourage other individuals to subsequently emulate same. By definition everyone can't be a hero. This of course pertaining primarily to enlisted men. ( Do a side-by-side comparison of senior officer photos to senior enlisted photos in full dress!)

However Sapper got me thinking on a 'Rorke's Drift' medal (it certainly would have made identifying all the defenders easier!). Of course at the time medals were only awarded for certain entire campaigns but something along the following lines would have seemed appropriate (perhaps as 'The Royal Unit Citation') -

"Criteria: The Distinguished Unit Citation is awarded to units of the Armed Forces of the United States and co-belligerent nations for extraordinary heroism in action against an armed enemy occurring on or after 7 December 1941. The unit must display such gallantry, determination, and esprit de corps in accomplishing its mission under extremely difficult and hazardous conditions as to set it apart and above other units participating in the same campaign. The degree of heroism required is the same as that which would warrant award of a Distinguished Service Cross to an individual. Extended periods of combat duty or participation in a large number of operational missions, either ground or air is not sufficient. This award will normally be earned by units that have participated in single or successive actions covering relatively brief time spans. It is not reasonable to presume that entire units can sustain Distinguished Service Cross performance for extended time periods except under the most unusual circumstances. Only on rare occasions will a unit larger than battalion qualify for award of this decoration." [They are awarded to individual companies.]

Name changed in 1966 to "The Presidential Unit Citation", the decoration is worn on the left breast, is a permanent decoration for those who served in the unit at the time it was awarded but displayed also on any individual while subsequently serving in that unit. (I.E. - If you were there when it was awarded you get to wear it forever, regardless of subsequent transfers, if you join the unit later you get to wear it only while serving with that unit.)

Despite a lack of formal collective recognition there was of course, none the less, universal appreciation offered, one rather elegant example being from "Punch", 29 March 1879, under the column heading "The Rorke's Drift Roll-Call" -

""An Officer" writes to Punch --

"In your Cartoon of March 22, you, as worthy head of the Army, thank Lieutenants Chard and Bromhead for their heroic defence of Rorke's Drift. In the background are to be seen some men of the 24th Regiment, and scattered about are quantities of Commissariat Supplies. Cannot you find some corner for a memorial to the only officer who was killed that night while gallantly doing his duty, Assistant-Commissary Byrne? Should you ignore the only officer 'severely wounded,' to whom all were indebted for his advice and skill in turning his supplies of flour and biscuits into parapets--Assistant Commissary Dalton? Or the young officer who gained the admiration of all by erecting the last defence under heavy fire, Assistant-Commissary Dunne? Or Surgeon Reynolds, who only laid aside his rifle to attend to the wounded?"

Punch only wishes his Cartoon was as large as his gratitude, in which case he would certainly have found room not only for these gallant officers--combatant or non-combatant, who assisted in the defence of Rorke's Drift--but for every man who plied a biscuit box, fisted a mealie-bag, levelled a rifle, or plied a bayonet on that memorable night. But pages have their limits, though gratitude has none, and so Punch and his artist have been fain to lump under the names and presentments of the most prominent leaders of that noble defence all the officers and men who contributed to it, in their several ranks and capacities. He rejoices that "An Officer's" letter, in mentioning many of these names, secures a record of them in his immortal pages."

[It must be remembered that for an individual award for valour to be presented that an officer has to witness it and have it stick out in his mind above all the other events of an action. Rather a tall order for the night of 22 Jan. 1879!]

Best

Michael

Posted: Thu Jul 17, 2008 6:18 pm

Hello everyone,

I can only concur with the words expressed above that in all honesty, none of us can judge men who were placed in a circumstance we can but envisage in our nightmares. Nonetheless, our judgements are what make this forum tick and as such it is always interesting and I believe, essential, to keep debate in strong flow. Aside from the black and white facts of Rorke's Drift, names, uniforms, locations and even to the extent of debating the height of certain defenders, it has been the simple matter of human endurance that means this battle is still debated nearly 130 years on.

It has been of particular annoyance to me when recent popular 'histories' have hammered home the notion that John Chard was pretty much an unremarkable man who performed remarkably when the chips were down. Is that in anyway untrue? No, it's very true and the fact it is so is all the more compelling. Were any of the Rorke's Drift defenders remarkable people? No, of course not. They were footslogging British Infantry, hardly the cream of human greatness. They were old timers on their way to discharge. They were farm hands and city boys. They were NNC NCOs, colonial brutes unfit for the Volunteers. Officers in their thirties still mere Lieutenants. Sick men suffering from the curse of a land with which they were not prepared and the hazzards of a soldier's life. In the case of Adendorff, a man who had fled and no doubt felt a coward for it but in the same day made amends and stood firm when the odds were similarly poor. It is what makes this battle remarkable. These men were nobodies who became somebody. One may argue that they simply had no choice, they were doing what they were paid to do. That said, they did it. They could have fled but they stood firm and overcame adversity. That, in my opinion, is one of the basic principles of life. These men were faced with a challenge that was simply a matter of life or death and came through it. No doubt most would have wished that the 22nd of January had passed by the dull day it seemed to begin as, but for most of the men there, it was the supreme peak of their unremarkable lives.

With regards to medals, I find it hard to explain, but it is not an aspect of military history that arouses any zest in me. The human achievement and endurance under immense pressure is what I find the tonic of reading and researching this period. Maybe I'm too spiritual and find giving somebody a charminlgy crafted bronze cross a bit meaningless. It's very much a fixture of the period but no doubt today, for soldiers, being awarded a medal is a source of tremendous pride. It carries different meanings to different people. I would wager that relatives of those who were awarded the VC are far more proud of what their forebear did, the immense bravery they displayed, than simply the fact they were awarded a medal. The pride is the same for those descendants who are not related to a Rorke's Drift VC holder, such as those of Frank Bourne. No VC but still one of the most celebrated defenders.

Peter, to sum up my fabulously rambling and confusing spurt of gabble, I am not one for medals or awards, it seems to unfairly catergorise those who were there when fate and circumstance decided. I could be very cynical and say that Joseph Williams deserved a posthumous VC because he killed 14+ Zulus, I'm sure his badly dismembered corpse would smile at the idea. For me, it's the human aspect that shines through more than anything else. Medals, they're not for me, but if they were something that enhanced the lives of these fellows, then all to the good.

Cheers,

Glenn

Posted: Thu Jul 17, 2008 6:43 pm

Dear Michael/Glenn,
therefore in addition to the S.A. campaign medal, there would be a particular medal for the indivdual engagement at Rorke's Drift. It would therefore be appropriate do you think to also decorate soldiers/officers for other engagements of the SA campaign, who would have an equally valid arguement to be decorated with an 'engagement medal' such as:
12th Jan Sihayo's Kraal.
22nd Jan Isandlwana.
Nyezane.
12th Mar Ntombe River.
28th Mar Hlobane
29th Mar Khambula
2nd April Gingindlovu.
4th July Ulundi.

This would ultimately have lead to the creation of 'engagement medals' for every engagement after this period of British and Colonial Military History. I agree with you in essence, but would this suggestion have been accommodated do you think?
Glenn we haven't seen you on here in ages. How's your studying going. I didn't spot you anywhere at Ruddington on Sunday.

Tony.

Posted: Thu Jul 17, 2008 7:03 pm

Hi Tony,

I've been here in the wings more often than not. University has kept me really busy in more ways than simply work I'm happy to say so this has meant hobbies taking a little bit of a back seat, more time to induldge this Summer hopefully. Cool

You've perfectly illustrated my point about the discriminatory nature of medal awarding and the huge undertaking necessary to award everybody individually for specific actions. I think the notion of such meticulous recognition as postulated to be sound in theory, but as you say, it's a mammoth and unrealistic undertaking and totally flies in the face of the fickle nature that so characterised the Victorian age especially.

My attendance at events this year has been virtually non existent due to work but I intend making a couple this Summer. I heard Ruddington was an immense success so that's fantastic. I do hope all is well with you?

Cheers,

Glenn

Posted: Thu Jul 17, 2008 7:38 pm

Glenn

I think you make a very good point, especially in your last remark. Although decorations and the status they conferred may have been very important in Victorian times, I suspect the RD defenders (the privates & corporals anyway) would have snatched the hand off someone who offered them steady employment for the rest of their lives & freedom from hunger or premature decline, ahead of any offer of a decoration - even in the day when a decoration or a good discharge testimonial was regarded as a passport to steady employment.

Of course, the VC came with its valuable pension, a boon to the labouring man. But the VC seems to have done very little good in practical terms for some of the 1879 recipients. Hook, for example, was one of the more well known 1879 VCs, yet was reduced to begging for testimonials from Chelmsford, Wolseley and Chard et al for assistance in procuring very menial employment long after his active service days. Perhaps a decent gratuity or pension would have served these defenders better in later life. But then - who was to differentiate between a RD defender and, say, an Isandlwana or Khambula survivor? Perhaps, after all, those who fared better afterwards were the steady sort who would have done all right anyway, and those who struggled would have struggled whether they'd been AZW heroes or not? Hook abandoned his wife and children to take the shilling and disappear, becoming, as it turned out, a hero of the age - but who is to say that his short, unhappy subsequent life would have been any different had he never "jumped ship" in the first place?

Peter

Posted: Thu Jul 17, 2008 7:54 pm

Dear Peter/Glenn,
here, here Peter. As is the case with the recent attempted deportation of a Gurkha, I would like to see all combatants equally well looked after once they have finished their various 'tours of duty'. As so often is the case, these brave men merely 'fall by the wayside'.
Glenn, I thought it might be the case where you have had your head permanently 'stuck in books' possibly of a different sort than AZW related works but best of luck with the University studies. Apart fom recently having all the rubbish pulled from my knees due to the sporting excesses of my youth, I'm fine thanks.

Tony.